Army Corps of Engineers officials were greeted with dismay and agitation Thursday from activists worried that the agency might abandon plans to remove the Long Beach breakwater.

Corps and city officials told the Southern California News Group this month that the federal agency’s three tentative proposals to improve marine habitat in the San Pedro Bay excluded any modification to the breakwater. City alternatives that would include demolishing at least a portion of the 2.5-mile rock structure would also be considered.

But the possibility of the project proceeding without some breakwater modification frustrated activists whose two decades of advocacy led to the joint corps and city effort.

“The breakwater was the whole reason this study was started — and now we might not have that modification at all,” complained activist Steve Marion at a downtown Long Beach meeting sponsored by the city’s chapter of the Surfrider Foundation.

Audience members listen to a discussion on the future of the breakwater in Long Beach on Thursday, Jun 21, 2018. The Surfrider Foundation held a public meeting with city officials and the Army Corps of Engineers to update the restoration plans for the San Pedro Bay in Long Beach and the future of the easternmost breakwater. (Photo by Scott Varley, Contributing Photographer)

Seamus Innes of the Surfrider Foundation discusses their hope for the removal of the breakwater in Long Beach on Thursday, Jun 21, 2018. The Surfrider Foundation held a public meeting with city officials and the Army Corps of Engineers to update the restoration plans for the San Pedro Bay in Long Beach and the future of the easternmost breakwater. (Photo by Scott Varley, Contributing Photographer)

Sound

The gallery will resume inseconds

Ed DeMesa of the Army Corps of Engineers fields questions from audience members in Long Beach on Thursday, Jun 21, 2018. The Surfrider Foundation held a public meeting with city officials and the Army Corps of Engineers to update the restoration plans for the San Pedro Bay in Long Beach and the future of the easternmost breakwater. (Photo by Scott Varley, Contributing Photographer)

Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell asks a question during a discussion on the future of the breakwater in Long Beach on Thursday, Jun 21, 2018. The Surfrider Foundation held a public meeting with city officials and the Army Corps of Engineers to update the restoration plans for the San Pedro Bay in Long Beach and the future of the easternmost breakwater. (Photo by Scott Varley, Contributing Photographer)

Joshua Hickman of the City of Long Beach explains the timeline on the fate of the breakwater in Long Beach on Thursday, Jun 21, 2018. The Surfrider Foundation held a public meeting with city officials and the Army Corps of Engineers to update the restoration plans for the San Pedro Bay in Long Beach and the future of the easternmost breakwater. (Photo by Scott Varley, Contributing Photographer)

The breakwater removal would return surfing to Long Beach as well as promote ocean circulation that would help clean the area of the trash and debris that wash ashore from the Los Angeles River, according to activists.

Ed De Mesa, chief of planning for the Los Angeles district of the Army Corps, explained that the corps-authorized mission was restoring marine habitat.

“We’re going through the process right now to determine whether breakwater modification would contribute to aquatic restoration,” De Mesa said. But the city’s eagerness to consider breakwater removal would also be considered, he said.

“Ultimately, the plan is something that we can support together,” he said.

Activists counter that the three-year, $3-million study now underway was should focus on removing the bay’s easternmost breakwater, and see the possibility of no breakwater modification as a betrayal.

They received support at Thursday’s meeting from Assemblyman Patrick McDonnell, D-Long Beach. He noted that the area originally had a sandy bottom, and the Army Corps proposal to plant more eel grass and kelp would not restore the east San Pedro Bay’s original habitat.

“If you’re not studying the breakwater, you’re not comporting with the original mission,” he said after the meeting, while adding that the safety of beachfront homes and maritime activities also needed to be ensured.

Future plans

The city, once dubbed the Waikiki of the West Coast, could see a resurgence of beach goers that would result in $52 million annually in local spending and economic activity, and nearly $7 million in taxes and parking fees, according to a 2009 city finding on the economic benefits of removing the Long Beach breakwater.

The Army Corps has said it expects to settle on a “Tentatively Selected Plan” in September and release the plan for public comment in November before reaching a final decision. The plan was originally scheduled to be picked in May but was delayed because some studies took longer than anticipated.

Following the construction of two breakwaters to the west, which allowed development of the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports, the Long Beach breakwater was completed in 1949 to protect the Navy fleet stationed there. The Navy base and shipyards are no longer in the bay.

A chief concern with removing the breakwater is that it would make homes on the Long Beach peninsula, at the south end of the city’s coast, more vulnerable to flooding during high tides and big surf.

A letter from the Long Beach chapter of Surfrider, which formed in 1996 with the sole mission of removing the breakwater, pointed out that the beach there would need to be augmented to protect the homes if key portions of the breakwater were taken away.

The letter also noted that removing the breakwater could necessitate small breakwaters to protect two of the oil islands, replacing the Belmont Pier with a sturdier structure and increasing wave protection near the entrance to Shoreline Marina, Rainbow Harbor, Catalina Landing and the Queen Mary.

On the other hand, it said that the breakwater is a hazard to to small boats, and removing it could minimize or eliminate that hazard.

“It is a common occurrence for small craft to lose propulsion outside the breakwater and drift onto the rocks,” says the letter from the Long Beach chapter of Surfrider. “If the crest of the breakwater were removed to a depth sufficient for vessels to pass over, they would not flounder on the breakwater.”

Martin Wisckol covers coastal environment and development. Previously, he spent two decades as politics reporter and columnist for the Orange County Register. He’s also held reporting positions in Miami, Jacksonville, Detroit and his hometown of San Diego, with an emphasis on land use and urban planning. He is a lifelong surfer and has spent most of his life on the coast. His work has been honored by the Society of Professional Journalists, the National Headliner Awards, the California Newspaper Publishers Association, the Florida Press Club and the American Planning Association Florida Chapter.